Unlocking the Potential for District-Wide Reform

Carol Campbell and Michael Fullan

The Literacy Numeracy Secretariat

Ministry of Education, Ontario

May 2006

This is a cross-case analysis of eight case studies of districts in Ontario, Canada, that are attempting to achieve district-wide improvement in literacy and numeracy at the elementary school level. We first put the study in context, then describe what we did and what we found including lessons learned, and then take up next steps.

In 2003, as part of a new government initiative, Ontario launched a major province wide strategy to achieve substantial improvements in literacy and numeracy. The starting point for reform was a five year period of limited improvement in performance where the overall percentage of 12 year olds (grade 6) achieving proficiency in literacy and numeracy was about 54%, based on the Province's assessment as carried out by the independent agency, the Education Quality and Accountability Office (EQAO).

In the fall of 2003, the new government launched a strategy designed to achieve major improvements in all 3983 elementary schools, in all 72 districts that make up the public education system (English and French language, Public and Catholic). The strategy includes:

§ Setting a target of 75% of 12 year old students achieving at or above the provincial standard for 2008.

§ Establishing The Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat to work in a two-way partnership with districts and schools.

§ Adding considerable new resources for literacy and numeracy including materials, professional development, staffing and initiatives linked to local and provincial needs.

§ Negotiating, through The Secretariat, yearly aspirational targets and board improvement plans with each district.

§ Engaging in capacity building which includes focusing on district and school strategies for achieving improvement such as developing school improvement teams, strengthening the role of the principal, helping schools develop collaborative learning cultures, and increasing assessment for learning capabilities at the school, district, and provincial level.

§ Fostering lateral capacity building where schools and districts learn from each other about effective instructional practices in literacy and numeracy, and learn about effective change strategies for school-wide and district-wide improvement.

§ Fostering a commitment to both raising overall student achievement levels and pursuing equity of outcomes by 'raising the bar and closing the gap' in educational performance.

§ A commitment to drawing on the wider knowledge base to inform the strategies, as well as a commitment to use knowledge to inform decisions as the strategy unfolded, and to contribute to the growing knowledge base about large scale reform.

The proposition was how to mobilize tri-level reform engagement in improvement involving the school and community, the district, and the government. The government undertook to proactively use the change knowledge - what we call 'capacity building with a focus on results' - to achieve major results within a short period of time. Some schools and districts were already moving in this direction—in this sense they were ahead of the government but the new goal was to have system-wide change in all 72 districts.

In addition to The Secretariat's direct target setting and capacity building role, it is to foster inquiry and identification of effective practices. One initiative along these lines - the one we report here - was to identify what is known on the ground about district-wide reform. We set out to identify districts that a) had seemed to have sound strategies at work, and b) were getting results as indicated by trends in EQAO assessments. What we wanted to know was what was going on under different conditions as districts went about this difficult and important work.

We ended up identifying eight districts of the 72 districts in Ontario that represent a wide range of circumstances. This cross-case analysis provides an overview of what we found. The eight districts themselves benefited by having us help them articulate and profile their stories; other districts are now benefiting as part of our effort to spread the word. The case study districts do not offer uniform blueprints for effective strategies, but rather provide concrete examples of what effective strategies look like in practice and in context. In another sense, the cases take all the excuses off the table because they represent the gamut of types of districts in the province from large multi-cultural districts in the south to massive geographically spread regions in the north with large aboriginal populations.

In the rest of this paper we describe the nature of the districts, the methodology used, and the main findings. We then conclude with a brief discussion of next steps. The goal is not only to unlock the potential of district-wide reform, but also to determine how entire provinces might change by design. The larger proposition is how can political leaders, school districts, schools, union leaders, parents and the public engage in reform that benefits all, as measured by transparent results.

The Effective District-Wide Strategies to Raise Student Achievement in Literacy and Numeracy Project

The 'Effective District-Wide Strategies' Project began in Summer 2005. The purpose of the project was to identify districts in Ontario that are demonstrating improvements in literacy and numeracy and to evaluate the strategies, actions and outcomes associated with such improvements.

The research questions focused around three key areas of enquiry:

1. District's Strategy and Actions

Questions included:

§ What is the district's approach to improving student achievement in literacy and numeracy?

§ What is the main purpose driving this approach and what are the goals to be achieved?

§ What strategies and actions are in place on a district-wide basis?

§ What is the structure and operation of the district to support a focus on student achievement?

§ What are the roles and responsibilities of key individual post-holders within the district?

2. Connections between District and Schools

Questions included:

§ Has a shared focus on literacy and/or numeracy been fostered across all schools?

§ At the school level, what initiatives and actions have taken place to improve student achievement in literacy and numeracy?

§ What is the relationship between the district and schools in supporting literacy/numeracy improvements?

§ How does the district challenge all schools to improve?

§ What types of support do schools receive from the district?

§ How is professional learning shared within and across schools?

3. Impact of District's Strategies and Actions and Future Developments

Questions included:

§ Overall, how effective is the district's approach to improving student achievement in literacy and numeracy?

§ What specific strategies and actions have been most effective?

§ What have been the main difficulties encountered and how have these been addressed?

§ How can improvements become sustainable?

§ What further developments are planned or required to improve student achievement district-wide?

§ What has been the key learning for the district in improving student achievement in literacy and/or numeracy?

§ What lessons have been learned of relevance to other districts and/or for province-wide reform?

The research method involved visits to each of the eight districts. Interviews were conducted with members of the Senior Administrative Teams (Directors of Education and Supervisory Officers/Superintendents) in all eight districts and other relevant central staff (for example, curriculum co-ordinators, consultants, coaches). A sample of school principals were interviewed in each district. School visits involving further discussion with principals and with teachers and other staff, plus classroom observations, were also undertaken. Through this approach, the project attempted to gather views from the central office and from the school and to compare and contrast these perspectives. We were interested in exploring the connections between districts and schools in system improvement and the ways in which effective districts foster collective commitment and responsibilities for student achievement.

The Eight Districts

The eight districts that participated in the effective district-wide strategies project were:

§ Bluewater District School Board

§ Catholic District School Board of Eastern Ontario

§ Conseil des écoles catholiques du langue français du Centre-Est

§ Huron-Perth Catholic District School Board

§ Keewatin-Patricia District School Board

§ Sudbury Catholic District School Board

§ York Catholic District School Board

§ York Region District School Board

The eight districts were deliberately selected to represent a wide range of sizes, locations and contexts. In terms of student populations, three of the districts are small (fewer than 500 students in Grade 6 in 2004/05), three are medium sized (1000-2000 Grade 6 students) and two are large (over 3000 students in Grade 6). However, the student numbers only tell part of the story. The districts with small student numbers are covering large geographical areas with the challenges of remoteness and dispersed communities. Whereas the large districts contain concentrated urban and suburban communities with diverse populations combining areas of affluence in close proximity to disadvantaged communities.

Ontario has French and English, Public and Catholic education systems. The eight districts were selected across each of these systems. One district is French-language and seven are English-language. Five districts are within the Catholic education system, whereas three are in the Public system (all eight are publicly funded).

All eight districts are committed to raising student achievement in literacy and numeracy and have demonstrated improvement over time. However, their current achievement levels differ. Following the 2004/05 EQAO assessment results, four of the districts are above the provincial average results for Reading, Writing and Mathematics at both Grade 3 and 6. These districts are amongst the highest achieving in the province. At Grade 6, conseil des écoles catholiques du langue français du Centre-Est has results of 75% for Reading and 80% for both Writing and Mathematics. This district is demonstrating that the provincial goal of 75% is achievable. Huron-Perth Catholic, York Catholic and York Region are currently very close to the provincial target in Grade 6 with results ranging from 68%-74% across subjects. At Grade 3, Huron-Perth Catholic District School Board is above 75% in Reading and Writing. York Region and York Catholic both have two subject areas above 70% at Grade 3. As well as being high achieving, these boards are also demonstrating consistent year-on-year improvement across subjects and grades. Huron-Perth Catholic District School Board, for example, has demonstrated remarkable improvement with double-figure increases in results for all subject areas within the past three years. Since 2002/03, Huron-Perth Catholic District School Board's Reading scores have increased by 32 percentage points at Grade 3 and sixteen percentage points at Grade 6. York Catholic and York Region have also both demonstrated year-on-year improvement in all subject areas at Grade 6.

One district – Bluewater District School Board - is above the provincial average at Grade 3, but below the provincial average at Grade 6. This district has demonstrated consistent year-on-year improvement over the past three or more years in all subjects. At Grade 3, all subjects have shown double-figure improvement in percentage points, for example students achieving at or above the provincial standard in Mathematics moved from 40% in 2001/02 to 70% in 2004/05.

Three districts are below the provincial average in most subjects, however these districts are also demonstrating improvement over time, generally consistent year-on-year improvement across all subject areas. The districts provide evidence of effectiveness in moving from low achievement levels to higher achievements with focused efforts. Keewatin-Patricia District School Board, for example, has demonstrated remarkable improvement since 2002/03. At Grade 3, the district's EQAO results increased by 25 percentage points in Writing (from 38% to 53%), by 24 percentage points in Math (from 38% to 62%) and by 23 percentage points in Reading (from 31% to 54%). At the same time in Keewatin-Patricia District School Board, there has also been growth at Grade 6 with increased results by 16 percentage points in Reading, 10 percentage points in Math and 5 percentage points in Writing. The Catholic District School Board of Eastern Ontario has also shown consistent improvement in all subjects at Grade 3 and 6 during the past three years, with improvement around ten percentage points in each subject. Sudbury Catholic District School Board have also demonstrated overall improvement across subject areas over time, particularly in Grade 3 Reading and Grade 6 Math. They do not yet have consistent year-on-year improvement in all subject areas and provide an example of a district recognizing the need for further focused work around literacy and numeracy to extend and sustain improvement.

The provincial goal is for 75% students at or above provincial standard in EQAO Grade 6 assessments. The Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat is working in partnership with boards across Ontario to achieve this result. This project is part of The Secretariat's work to unlock potential for sharing successful practices. The project has not just focused on high achieving boards but also on growth and improvement in both lower performing and higher performing boards to identify effective practices for districts at different stages of improvement and achievement levels and to learn lessons across the range of contexts and experiences in Ontario.

Effective District-Wide Strategies to Raise Student Achievement in Literacy and Numeracy: Key Components

Across the eight districts, we identified 12 key components of effective practices which link to four broad strategic areas (see figure 1). Our focus in this project was on effective district-wide strategies for both system and school improvement. The 12 components are relevant at district, school and classroom levels. Indeed, in effective districts these features form an interactive framework for action district-wide and within schools.

One strategic area is 'Leading with Purpose and Focusing Direction'. This area encompasses three key components. The first component is 'Leadership for Learning' which involves both individual and collective leadership to support improvement in professional learning and student learning. The second component is establishing vision and shared focus on student achievement as the priority. The third component is moral purpose informing strategies and practices to unlock potential for improvement. This moral purpose includes the overall importance of education for economic and social development plus daily practices to support students' character, emotional and social development.

Another strategic area is 'Designing a Coherent Strategy, Co-ordinating Implementation and Reviewing Outcomes'. This includes four key components. The first component is the development of a coherent overarching strategy for student achievement in literacy and numeracy. The second component is the identification and allocation of resources prioritized to the system focus on improved student achievement. A third component is the effective organization at district, school and classroom levels to support student achievement including attention to the roles and responsibilities of staff. The fourth component is the routine use of system and school-level monitoring and review of targets and outcomes achieved, reviewing progress to inform future action and holding to account schools and system leaders for improvement.

The next strategic area is 'Developing Precision in Knowledge, Skills and Daily Practices for Improving Learning'. This involves three key components. One component is attention to capacity building to extend professional learning, particularly in the areas of literacy and numeracy instruction, assessment for learning, classroom management and instructional leadership. A second component is careful attention to curriculum development, instruction and interventions to improve teaching and learning for all students. The third component is the regular use and understanding of data at a system and school level and the development of assessment literacy within schools to ensure instruction is informed by data about student learning and progress.

The final strategic area is 'Sharing Responsibility through Building Partnerships'. This involves two key components. First is the fostering of partnerships within the system, for example between central office and schools and across schools, and with parents, communities and other organizations and agencies to build shared involvement in, and responsibilities, for supporting student learning. This requires also the second component of clear communication where a consistent message about raising student achievement is communicated widely, frequently and with a sense of urgency.

While each of the above four broad areas, encompassing 12 key components, can be explored in isolation, for example focusing on leadership or on instruction, it is their combined strength that is vital. A district that is strong on only one or two of these components will not achieve its full potential. It is important to note also, the components are not mutually exclusive rather they interact and influence each other in practice.

Effective District-Wide Strategies to Raise Student Achievement in Literacy and Numeracy

A. Leading with Purpose and Focusing Direction

1. Leadership for Learning. We refer here to 'Leadership for Learning' to emphasize that the leadership was purposeful and focused on supporting learning. This focus on learning includes leadership to support both professional learning and to direct strategies and actions for improved student learning and achievement. The educators we met with – directors, supervisory officers, coaches, principals, teachers – were instructional leaders demonstrating deep knowledge of teaching and learning which they discussed, modeled and encouraged throughout the district. We use the broader term 'Leadership for Learning', however, to indicate that the district leaders we met who were not directly educators, for example Supervisory Officers with business qualifications, also shared a strong commitment to, and understanding of, the importance of their role in supporting student learning at the system level.

Across the districts, there was strong evidence of individual and collective leadership being exercised and fostered. The combination of both individual and collective leadership is important. Individuals demonstrated strong leadership skills both in the processes of supporting system change and in their individual educational expertise. By working collaboratively through teams, collective leadership was also developed and encouraged to ensure that shared leadership was drawing on the range of individual expertise to produce best thinking to inform strategies and actions. This is part of developing the two-way street between individual expertise and system transformation through shared leadership.

The districts demonstrated leadership for learning at all levels of the system. This leadership provided clear strategic direction focusing on raising student achievement in literacy and numeracy. Trustees supported board and school leaders to focus on building the capacity of the system to raise student achievement. The Director consistently provided leadership focused on raising student achievement at system level. The Senior Administrative Team and board staff demonstrated leadership in promoting and developing capacity for literacy and numeracy. Principals were trained as instructional leaders and this was reflected in their daily practices. At the school-level, the principal's leadership was very important to supporting school improvement and successful practices to improve teaching and learning. Teacher leaders were developed, for example lead literacy and numeracy teachers, to support system, school and classroom improvement in literacy and numeracy instruction and to build professional capacity of colleagues.

2. Vision and shared focus on student achievement as the priority. The districts' vision, mission and values focused on student achievement. Indeed, across the districts, the vision is for improving student achievement with literacy and numeracy as the priority focus for action. This priority includes attention to both raising overall achievement to higher levels and to equity of outcome for lower achieving student groups, i.e. to both 'raising the bar and closing the gap' in educational performance. This vision was clearly articulated in the districts' focused strategic direction and actions for student achievement.

A lack of focus on student achievement was widely understood as being unacceptable and there was low tolerance for excuses about poor performance. There was focused attention to identification of gaps in performance and attention to equity of outcomes for all student groups. This included attention to low performing schools within the district to ensure that all schools are improving.

The districts ensured that this vision for both 'raising the bar and closing the gap' was widely understood and there was a shared focus on the priority for student achievement. The Director and Trustees promoted this vision consistently. Board staff contributed to the vision and ensured that this vision was realized through day-to-day implementation district-wide. Principals had responsibility for developing and realising the vision for student achievement across their staff and within school practices. School staff shared a commitment to the vision for student achievement and this was reflected in coherence between the district's vision, school plans and classroom practices.

It is important to note that the districts did not develop a vision first in isolation and then implement it. They did have a strong sense of focused direction but they also built the vision on the ground through joint action. Staff collaboration and team working were important for developing shared focus. The effective use of meetings both at system level and within schools, for example whole school, division and grade level meetings, were important for building consensus and consistency in purpose and vision. This is consistent with our other work in which we find that shared vision is less a precondition of success and more an outcome of a quality process.

3. Moral Purpose Informing Practices to Unlock Potential for System, School and Student Development. The districts held an educational vision that extended beyond narrow attainment measures to a belief in the moral purpose of education, which included an expectation – and indeed assertion – that all students can learn and that all teachers can teach all students to learn given sufficient supports and time. The districts developed and promoted a culture of high expectations and positive attitudes for student learning and achievement.

The districts demonstrated a dual commitment and attention to academic achievement and to broader social, emotional, character and personal development for students. System leaders articulated, promoted and demonstrated moral purpose connecting the importance of educational improvement for individual, societal and economic development and equity outcomes. A values-based culture was fostered at board and school levels promoting collective moral purpose for improved student achievement and a shared commitment to all students' development and achievement. This purpose informed policies and practices for students' development and well-being, for example through early identification and intervention for students facing difficulties, early childhood programs, inter-agency working with health and social services. At a system and school level, anti-bullying and anti-discriminatory policies and practices were developed and implemented.

Within schools, this commitment to the moral purpose of schooling included fostering a supportive school culture and developing classroom practices to support children's holistic learning. Curriculum and instruction to support character and citizenship development of students, including fostering empathy for others and emotional intelligence, were implemented. Attention was paid to ensuring culturally relevant resources and materials were included within teaching and learning practices. A conducive learning climate including respectful behaviour was cultivated. Principals and teachers sought to foster relevant and meaningful connections between students' school lives, home and communities, to motivate and engage students and build partnerships with their homes.

B. Designing a Coherent Strategy, Co-ordinating Implementation and
Reviewing Outcomes

4. Overarching strategy. The districts had a planned, coherent and co-ordinated strategy which combined a commitment to both short-term needs and long-term sustainability. This involved a system multi-year strategy with district targets for student achievement in literacy and numeracy. Districts developed system literacy and/or numeracy frameworks that brought together all elements of intended strategies and actions to achieve student achievement goals. System plans, frameworks and guides were often developed collaboratively through a system committee involving central staff and school representatives for specific key areas of practice, such as board assessment and evaluation guides.

Complementing the multi-year strategy, the districts developed clear and concise annual board improvement plans and target setting practices. Board improvement plans included priorities, targets, actions, resources and staff responsible identified to implement priority goals. Strategies in the board improvement plan included a commitment to both raising achievement overall and to ensuring equity of outcome by identifying and targeting schools and student groups that are underperforming. Plans included use of research-based strategies and interventions to focus action on school and student improvement. The districts ensured that their board improvement plans were widely understood and informing actions at system and school levels.

In tri-level change initiatives, the development and implementation of a strategy for student achievement in literacy and numeracy requires attention also to the connections between provincial, board and school level developments. The districts sought to ensure that their local strategies connected with provincial strategies and took maximum advantage of provincial resources and opportunities to benefit their schools and students. Within the district, attention to ensuring school improvement plans and implementation was connected to the board improvement plan and priorities were also important. School improvement plans included strategies and interventions for implementation at school and classroom levels to meet targets for overall school achievement and, at the classroom level, for individual student progress. Within schools, attention to connections between the overall school improvement plan and teachers individual plans was also important.

Within the development of a coherent strategy, districts paid close attention to co-ordinating stages of implementation. This involved an understanding of managing a change process to support system reform and improvement. Multi-year strategies were carefully managed with phased implementation linked to the needs and stages of development within the district. As one Director commented, there is a need to 'think big, start small' in order to bring people with you in the change process. One approach to managing implementation over time was to sequence initiatives related to priority areas of focus, for example one district began with a focus on 'early literacy' (primary division), then included a focus on 'later literacy' (junior division), and then a focus on numeracy. This is not to suggest that each stage was exclusive and replaced the others, but rather the priority for implementation was sequenced over time. In another district, the change strategy began with targeted action with a small number of schools and then, with growing success, extending the strategy to involve all schools in the district.

There is also a need to identify the key issues that have to be attended to early in the improvement process, particularly removing 'distractors' that could prevent successful implementation of planned strategies. For example, in one district, the early stages of their focus on literacy and numeracy involved substantial work to build good working relationships with the teachers' federations to address staffing matters. Without addressing these issues upfront, the levels of improvement now achieved would have been difficult to secure. Across the districts, attention to resourcing and staffing was vital to remove potential distractors related to lack of support. The overarching strategy should also include attention to building sustainability of improvement over time. For example, districts developed strategies for building professional capacity and to growing leaders over time to sustain the focus on literacy and numeracy.

5. Resources prioritized to focus on improved student achievement. Alongside a district strategy and plan for raising student achievement, the districts ensured resources were identified, allocated and prioritized to the focus on improved student achievement. Trustees and Directors were prepared to make tough decisions around resource allocation to ensure monies were directed to the student achievement priority. In the districts, an important factor was that the supervisory officer with responsibility for budget understood and supported the commitment to student achievement as the priority for program based funding. Academic and Business Supervisory Officers worked together to allocate budget for student achievement. Resource allocation – staffing, funding and materials – was identified and provided for key activities within board and school improvement plans. It was not the case that these districts had more funding than others, but rather there was a clear commitment to maximize the funding and resources available and to direct these to the priority focus on literacy and numeracy. Monies were drawn from a range of budget lines and funding sources to ensure substantial resourcing for literary and numeracy initiatives.

Examples of resource allocation include the district-wide purchase and provision of key resources for staff development, including professional books and capacity building activities. Districts purchased system-wide resources for all schools to support classroom practices, such as formative assessment tools and teaching resources. The districts also identified and funded staffing at system and school levels to support literacy and numeracy improvement, for example literacy and numeracy coaches. There was also substantial investment in classroom and library resources to support literacy and numeracy, for example refurbishment of libraries, district wide provision of levelled books and manipulatives for all schools. Within schools, resources were also prioritized to the needs of students requiring support to improve their achievement.

6. Effective district organization. The districts were very aware of making sure that you have the 'right bus' and the 'right people on the bus' – or as one Director phrased this, 'making sure everyone is on the boat and rowing in the same direction'. Establishing an effective district organization to support the system focus on student achievement was important. The majority of the districts had restructured the central office and role of district staff to ensure the structure, staffing, roles and responsibilities aligned with the literacy and numeracy focus, including the roles of supervisory officers, consultants, curriculum co-ordinators and coaches. The appointment of supervisory officers with strong literacy and numeracy expertise to oversee and drive the district-wide improvement strategy was very important. Developing a structure and process where supervisory officers and other key staff had a strong presence across the system and in working with schools was also significant. For example, one large district located their supervisory officers with responsibilities for Families of Schools in community based offices to ensure a closer connection with their local areas. The districts were also creating positions for system principals, consultants and coaches with strong instructional expertise to work across schools. There was attention to recruiting staff at all levels with strong expertise in literacy and numeracy to enable focused conversations and consistent practices aligned to the student achievement priority district-wide.

There was attention also to ensuring a structure that supported collaborative working between district and school staff, for example the use of system committees to involve board and school staff in system planning and strategies. The effective organization and use of meetings at a central level and within schools was a key feature. The establishment of improvement teams at district and school levels were also important for ensuring a collective focus and effort on student achievement strategies.

To support direct working with schools, the districts were providing an allocation of dedicated time for literacy/numeracy coaches or equivalent to work in schools. Within schools, effective organization included time allocations for literacy and numeracy instruction, for example through a 'literacy block'. At the classroom level, attention to seating arrangements and group working were also important, for example teachers' use and understanding of when and why to use whole class, small group or individual student instructional strategies.

7. System and school-level monitoring, review, feedback and accountability. As well as a strategy and planned implementation, the districts paid close attention to monitoring implementation, reviewing progress and outcomes, and using this feedback both to generate accountability for improvement and also to review the strategy and revise actions when needed. Board improvement plans included targets with monitoring of deliverables and results. For example, in one district there was thorough and consistent use of SMART goals at both district and school levels with training provided to support staff in using this process effectively. Districts were also using annual system reviews to evaluate progress and outcomes in relation to system goals and priorities, for example through evaluation of both implementation and impact to date for priority actions within the board improvement plan. At district and school levels, there was use of student achievement data, both EQAO assessments and formative assessment data, to evaluate improvement and to identify student groups or curriculum areas requiring particular attention. Working with schools, supervisory officers set clear expectations that principals would discuss with teachers the progress of all students and review student data. Within schools, principals supported teachers to develop practices for classroom monitoring and review, including use of data, to assess the effectiveness of their instructional and classroom practices, and to modify practices when needed.

The development of accountability involved both the central office and schools. Senior Administrative Teams, including Directors and supervisory officers, were accountable publicly and they held to account schools for performance and improvement. For example, Directors would hold meetings with all principals to review student achievement and school performance results. System requirements were put in place for reporting from schools about achievement and progress. Reporting included gathering student formative assessment data consistently at specific times of the year to support both school and district-wide assessment of student learning. Some of the districts had also established processes for district-wide teacher inquiry/action research, particularly linked to school professional learning teams, with the requirement that these projects would include use of data and focus on student achievement and that results would be reported system-wide annually.

C. Developing Precision in Knowledge, Skills and Daily Practices for Improving Learning

8. Capacity building and professional learning for teachers and principals. All of the districts placed a strong emphasis on the importance of developing professional capacity, particularly for literacy and numeracy instructional knowledge, assessment, classroom management and leadership. Solid teacher capacity, expertise and commitment are crucial factors for ensuring effective teaching practices to raise student achievement. Across the districts, a combination of types of professional learning was provided and resourced, including use of external expertise, provincial training, board in-service, in-school job-embedded professional learning for individuals, and school and system professional learning teams. All the districts participated in Ministry training initiatives, such as those to support the Expert Panel Reports, summer institutes, and literacy and numeracy training provided through The Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat. In addition, districts developed and provided a range of in-service options linked to priority areas identified in the district's improvement plan, for example a district-wide commitment to a consistent approach to developing reading comprehension in all schools. The existence and use of release time to support professional development was important for ensuring individuals had the opportunity to participate and consolidate their learning.

Alongside out-of-school training initiatives focused on specific areas of expertise, districts also had a range of professional learning opportunities to support job-embedded development. The districts recognized the importance of sustained professional learning with follow up and further development after external training was received. The use of mentoring and induction programs were very well-received by teachers with benefits being cited both for those receiving and providing support. The benefit of working with colleagues in school to learn together was considered important across the staff we met with. The development of professional learning communities to build teams for improvement at school level was a common feature across the districts. In some districts, this approach was particularly well-developed with system support, guidance and meetings bringing schools together to ensure professional learning teams were provided with both the process and content expertise to focus on improving literacy and numeracy achievement. Some of the districts also used demonstration classrooms for literacy and numeracy as a way to encourage shared professional learning and enable teachers to visit other classrooms and learn from their peers.

The districts were also supporting a range of job-embedded support and follow-up through literacy/numeracy consultants, coaches, and lead teachers. School staff reported the importance of having time and support in school to ensure their learning gained through professional development was put into practice and that the use of literacy/numeracy coaches or consultants was important in supporting their work at classroom level. In one of the districts which was particularly geographically dispersed, the use of 'at-the-elbow' professional learning, where two colleagues worked together to improve each others practice, was a key part of the district strategy both due to a belief that this type of learning was particularly beneficial and also in recognition of the practical constraints on regularly bringing teachers together across a large geographical area. The purchase and use of professional reading materials in some of the districts also enabled teachers to extend their learning without having to travel to training events.

Therefore, across the districts, there was a combination of external and internal supports for capacity building which were important for ensuring that training was translated into practice with follow up and revision through experience in the classroom. Finally, the districts paid attention to developing widespread leadership both for the present and to enhance sustainability of reform. They emphasized 'leaders developing other leaders' as well as cultivating potential leaders for the future.

9. Curriculum development, instruction and interventions to improve teaching and learning for all students. As indicated above, a key element of professional capacity building work focused on enhancing principals' and teachers' curriculum knowledge in literacy and numeracy and developing a range of effective instructional practices. Curriculum development and instruction were also supported across the district through use of provincial and district reports, resources and guides. Careful attention was paid to implementation of the Ontario Curriculum and the Expert Panel reports to inform district-wide practice. Within the district, curriculum and instruction guides were also developed and distributed to all schools.

District policies and school practices included attention to instruction for specific student groups, for example through the district-wide special education plan. Districts identified the specific student groups requiring additional support within their schools and appropriate research-based interventions for instruction and classroom practices. For example, in one district with a high Aboriginal student population a priority focus was given to the development and implementation of an oral literacy project to support Aboriginal students' learning. The use of early intervention strategies to support struggling learners, for example as identified through reading diagnostic assessments, was used across the districts.

Within schools, principals with deep knowledge and understanding of successful literacy and numeracy practices were important for ensuring such approaches were applied in classrooms. The focus on literacy and numeracy began in Kindergarten with attention to transitions and scaffolding of learning across grade levels. Aligned with the district-wide focus on literacy and numeracy, classroom practices involved the implementation of a comprehensive and balanced literacy program and of problem-solving approaches to mathematics. Attention to the inter-connections of numeracy and literacy, for example by emphasising the use of reading and comprehension skills within mathematics teaching, was fostered, as was a cross-curricular emphasis on reading, writing and mathematics.

Teachers' instructional foci and practices were informed by attention to student formative assessment data (assessment for learning) and to curriculum expectations. Through the use of data and review of student learning progress, differentiated instruction strategies were developed and applied to meet the needs of students within classrooms. Teachers were using a range of evidence-based good practices for classroom practices, for example as outlined in Expert Panel reports or developed through training. Teaching strategies includes the use of a combination of teacher modelling and student learning through independent, small group and whole class work. Attention to the classroom environment, display and resources to support literacy and numeracy were also important.

Some of the districts had also implemented dedicated blocks of time for literacy instruction within schools. Through such approaches, the districts were ensuring sufficient classroom and learning time were being allocated to support the priority focus on student achievement in literacy. Teachers were also supported in their work by the existence of literacy and/or numeracy coaches with dedicated time to support developing strong instructional practices in reading, writing and/or mathematics. Through collaborative working with colleagues, teachers also developed and extended their individual instructional expertise.

10. Use of data & development of assessment literacy. The districts were committed to the importance of using data to inform system-wide planning and for guiding school and classroom practices. To ensure a consistent district-wide approach to the use and understanding of data, district-wide assessment and evaluation guides were developed to inform practice in schools and classrooms across the district. There was also district-wide collection, storage, analysis and reporting of student data to inform system planning and identification of schools and students requiring additional attention. The districts were paying attention to both summative assessment data (assessment of learning) such as the provincial EQAO assessments and to formative assessment data (assessment for learning) through developmental and diagnostic assessments conducted within schools. A range of approaches to data analysis were adopted, including software packages on desktops and the use of student tracking walls for staff review. Teachers were encouraged to look at data both for their individual class and in discussion with colleagues to generate debate about assessment of and for learning and student progress. At district and school levels, there was attention to disagreggation of data to focus on needs of sub-groups of students and to focus interventions. For example, teachers worked collaboratively with EQAO item level analysis to examine performance within curriculum areas. There was attention also to the performance of different student groups, for example students designated as having special education needs or English Language Learners.

The district-wide purchase and provision of assessment and diagnostic tools for all schools enabled consistent system-wide use of the same assessment tools. In order to support schools in using and understanding data, professional development on data analysis and assessment literacy was provided for principals and teachers. At the school-level, use of assessment for learning tools and data to inform classroom planning and instructional strategies was strongly supported. There was a clear expectation that teachers would regularly assess student progress and use this information to inform lesson planning and instructional practices. Assessment literacy is a high yield strategy in which increments of capacity in schools and in the district produce significant improvements in student learning. This is because assessment literacy can be directly related to informing instructional strategies and classroom practices that specifically influence student learning.

D. Sharing Responsibility through Building Partnerships

11. Positive and purposeful partnerships. The districts fostered partnerships. The building of partnerships and sharing of responsibility were both encouraged and valued at all levels of the system. For example, the Senior Administrative Team, including Director, were visible across the district and connected to schools through visits, meetings with principals, and attendance at system professional development events. These connections helped to model and foster a commitment to working together with a shared focus and responsibility for student achievement. Trustees and school councils also focused on a common commitment to student achievement for literacy and numeracy in discussions and decisions. At the school-level, professional learning communities within schools and lateral capacity building across schools were developed to support teachers and principals learning from each other. By developing positive connections at district and school levels, a sense of common purpose was fostered. A key element of building partnerships was to encourage positive and purposeful joint working with a shared responsibility for student achievement. This involves a shift in focus from 'my classroom' to 'our school', 'my school' to 'our board', and from 'my board' to 'our province'.

The districts and schools also sought to engage parents and communities in a shared responsibility for student achievement, for example through partnerships for volunteering, family literacy, and parents' meetings. Partnerships with external organizations and agencies were also fostered for example specific initiatives linked to student learning and development. This included partnership working with broader social and health services to support the commitment to students' emotional, physical and personal development alongside their academic achievement.

12. Communication. To develop shared understanding of the district's vision and focus and to build shared responsibility for the student achievement priority, effective communication is vital. In the districts studied, principals reported that schools felt supported by the district through regular two-way communication and a sense of common direction. This involved a clear articulation and understanding of the vision and strategy amongst all involved. The districts emphasised a clear and consistent message about raising student achievement and ensured this message was repeated frequently and with a sense of urgency. While this message remained consistent, different communication strategies were used for educators, parents and public. For communication within the district and schools, direct face-to-face communication through effective system and school meetings, plus use of print and electronic communication were important. A range of communication approaches were being used district-wide, such as Director's reports, curriculum newsletters, and e-mail. While some of these communications were also available publicly, specific public communications through newsletters, websites, and press releases were also vital to ensuring the district's message about student achievement was presented widely in a language and style appropriate for a general public audience.

Unlocking the Potential of District-Wide Reform

In summary, across the eight district case studies, we found evidence of successful practice relating to four broad strategic areas:

A. Leading with purpose and focusing direction;

B. Designing a coherent strategy, co-ordinating implementation and reviewing outcomes;

C. Developing precision in knowledge, skills and daily practices for improving learning;

D. Sharing responsibility.

Within these strategic areas, there are 12 key components:

§ Leadership for learning;

§ Vision and shared focus on student achievement as the priority;

§ Moral purpose informing strategies and practices;

§ Overarching strategy;

§ Resources allocation and prioritization;

§ Effective organization;

§ Monitoring, review, feedback and accountability;

§ Capacity building for professional learning;

§ Curriculum development, instruction and interventions;

§ Use of data and assessment literacy;

§ Positive and purposeful partnerships;

§ Communication.

The 'Effective District-Wide Strategies for Raising Student Achievement in Literacy and Numeracy' Project is one initiative as part of The Secretariat's commitment to identifying, celebrating and sharing effective practices. The findings reported in this paper are part of our strategic approach to inquiry in which we derive lessons from Ontario's education system on an ongoing basis and feed this back to Ontario's educators to inform practice and contribute to improvement. Together we can make a significant difference in student achievement by unlocking the potential for learning across Ontario.

Unlocking the potential of district-wide reform involves several requirements. First, the overall system – the province - must expect, foster and support districts to take focused action. Second, it is necessary, as we have done in this initiative, to identify cases in which specific strategies are in place so that we can examine what they look like in practice. Even with this increased precision, it is difficult to detail specifically "how to" make districts effective as there are no universal blueprints for success. The combination of strategies and the influence of local contexts, needs and experiences will vary in the implementation and outcomes of similar practices in different contexts. To a certain extent districts must identify and review their own particular solutions drawing on the best knowledge from evidence of successful practices locally and beyond. This could include comparing a district's existing strategies and actions against the twelve components identified in this report and reviewing what is currently working well, requiring improvement or absent. Third, while not offering precise blueprints, these cases can help other districts as they learn about what is happening and explore potential areas for development. This is enhanced also by our strategy of "lateral capacity building" as we support districts to collaborate and learn from and with each other. Fourth, by helping districts to articulate and tell their strategy stories, this initiative supported district and school leaders to reflect on and articulate about what they are doing, why, and with what results. This reveals one's usually tacit "theory of action" and strengthens the capacity to reflect on, refine and extend quality strategies. Fifth, as part of what we call the evolution of positive pressure, successful district cases that represent a range of circumstances contribute to removing excuses for low performance. No district in the province can claim that success is not possible. Although the cases are not intended to be exemplars or beacon cases, they are very much variations on successful themes. All districts in the province will move forward relative to their own starting point and in comparison with districts with similar profiles.

We know from past research that neither top-down prescriptive strategies nor bottom-up site-based strategies alone work. What is needed is a blend of the two. In tri-level reform, the district, as the mid part of the 'tri', is in a vital position to reconcile and harness top-down and bottom-up forces needed for large scale reform. In essence this is what unlocking potential is all about.

Acknowledgements

We want to express our thanks to the Directors of Education in each of the eight districts for agreeing to participate in this project. We want also to thank all the educators we met with in these districts and schools for their insights and willingness to discuss effective strategies and for their vital work for supporting student achievement.

We want to acknowledge also our colleagues on the 'effective district strategies' project team Dr Carmen Maggisano and Dr Carolyn Rees-Potter, Student Achievement Officers – Research from The Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat, and Professor Marie Josée Berger from the University of Ottawa, and to thank them for their contributions to the case studies.